Amen

This is to all the players out there who think that just because they are mining or missioning, that they are entitled to some kind of immunity from the griefers who gank them.

Do not fly around in what you cannot afford to lose or protect.

Don't disagree, but... Do we really need another thread on this?

.....[insert thread title #987,543,234 here]......

And you fly in highsec because.......?

And you fly in highsec because.......?

Two words: Stockholm Syndrome

Five words:
Quoted for lack of relevance.

He is a miner. Reading comprehension there bro.

So he says. Any player that is HAPPY to have fire rain down on their heads is either a masochist or flat-out lying.

I call "don't make my griefing too hard for me" troll post.

Two words: Stockholm Syndrome

This man is an example for carebears everywhere. Bravo sir. Bravo.

So he says. Any player that is HAPPY to have fire rain down on their heads is either a masochist or flat-out lying.

I call "don't make my griefing too hard for me" troll post.

I can pull out my certificates if you want.

Oh, I never asked griefers to take it easy on me. Just ask those who ganked me (ask Guillaume LeConquerant for a reference).

I can pull out my certificates if you want.

Oh, I never asked griefers to take it easy on me. Just ask those who ganked me (ask Guillaume LeConquerant for a reference).

We miners are hard working individuals that ensure that there is a constant stream of minerals needed for ship production. However, there are many miners like me who feel that destruction is so important to our bottom line that we even welcome griefers to try to attack us for whatever purpose they like

So he says. Any player that is HAPPY to have fire rain down on their heads is either a masochist or flat-out lying.

I call "don't make my griefing too hard for me" troll post.

or he's making a plea to the bitchy miners out there to stop being so bitchy.

Miners are hard working, industrial persons upon which all of EVE depends. People who make it a point to mess with Covetors in hi-sec "for the lulz" and then try to hide behind the (very thin) defense that "nowhere in EVE is safe" are cowardly carebears trying to push responsibility and blame for their own behavior onto a third party (CCP, "game mechanics", or the miners themselves.)

Quoted for accuracy.

To the miners.

Oh, and one more thing. Tank your god damn mining ships. The Goons are freakin everywhere killing miner and yet some miners still decide to fit for max yield at the expense of defenses. Who's really at fault here for losing their own mining ship?

Nowhere in New Eden is 100% safe.

Do not fly around in what you cannot afford to lose or protect.

.

stop preaching regurgitated sh|te

Mr. Miner> Hey Mr. Ganker, did you know that I am only here so you can play Eve the way you want?
Mr. Ganker> Thank you Mr. Miner, did you know I am only here to make sure you can't?

I thought you were better than this.

This is to all the players out there who think that just because they are mining or missioning, that they are entitled to some kind of immunity from the griefers who gank them.

play another game.

There you go :D

Who's really at fault here for losing their own mining ship?

Well let's see: Would the mining ship have been blown up where it not for the criminal actions of the ganker?
Hm: Nope!

Well gee, that sort of suggest that the criminal is responsible, doesn't it? Whether a miner tanks his Hulk or not is irrelevant; a vulnerable target does not abrogate criminal responsibility. Technically the criminals are the ones who are responsible - not their victims - since, logically, the issue of "tanking your Hulk" would not even exist where it not for said criminals.

...stuff said...

Well let's see: Would the mining ship have been blown up where it not for the criminal actions of the ganker?
Hm: Nope!

Well gee, that sort of suggest that the criminal is responsible, doesn't it? Whether a miner tanks his Hulk or not is irrelevant; a vulnerable target does not abrogate criminal responsibility. Technically the criminals are the ones who are responsible - not their victims - since, logically, the issue of "tanking your Hulk" would not even exist where it not for said criminals.

it is not a "chicken and egg" problem. It completely and 100% starts with the criminal, and fault rests upon their shoulders.

I mean, this is basic logic. I'm surprised so many EVE players have such a hard time with it... since EVE players spend a good deal of their time bragging about how smart they are for playing EVE....

Now, this isn't to say that someone shouldn't pay attention to their surroundings and protect themselves. However, at the end of the day, the argument that "it's your fault that someone broke into your house and stole your belongings because, after all, you own a house with valuable items inside" is ridiculous and would never pass in any court system. You don't like a rapist go unpunished simply because his victim "should have been paying better attention." Such ideas are ludicrous.

"Why is that?" you ask? Simple: In the real world, which EVE is nothing like by the way, people can only be held accountable for their own actions.

True, EVE is just a game. However, EVE is no longer filling a "niche" - EVE is now in the mainstream, and like it or not, the type of people who are being drawn to EVE are not the same sort of players who got into the game 3, 4, 8 years ago. CCP is going to either have to adapt to these new players (and secure more capital in the process), or it'll unnecessarily restrict itself to a very small player market, which will eventually exhaust itself.

*shrug*

"Why is that?" you ask? Simple: In the real world, which EVE is nothing like by the way, people can only be held accountable for their own actions.

This man get's it.

There ARE new players coming in all the time. How many LEAVE because they have next to no chance at getting a decent start. The bittervets have AMPLE opportunity to play Eve - elsewhere. They PREFER to sit in highsec killing noobs (or supporting it) and then justify it with "This is Eve" bullshit. Pure and simple.

If we keep catering only for the bandy-kneed old men of Eve it will become "Bittervets Retirement Home version 4".

And I truly wonder what would happen if they did.

Under normal situations, yes. It's the criminal's fault. But having an entire alliance such as Goonswarm running around ganking miners (while paying others to do the same and announcing it ahead of time) is not a normal situation. Neither was Hulkageddon. Yet players decided to not properly tank their ships during these events. My argument still stands.

Edited for grammar.

This man get's it.

There ARE new players coming in all the time. How many LEAVE because they have next to no chance at getting a decent start. The bittervets have AMPLE opportunity to play Eve - elsewhere. They PREFER to sit in highsec killing noobs (or supporting it) and then justify it with "This is Eve" bullshit. Pure and simple.

If we keep catering only for the bandy-kneed old men of Eve it will become "Bittervets Retirement Home version 4".

Partly why we got an apology is my guess

Irrelevant.

A house could have it's doors wide open and no car in the parking lot... but you and you alone would still be held criminally responsible were you to enter the house and take something from it.

Someone could leave their car running and the door wide open... but you and you alone would still be held criminally responsible were you to drive off in it.

And before anyone wants to whine about how "but that's real life, EVE is just a game", my response is: Isn't EVE suppose to be "just like real life"? :-)

Oh I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that we were suddenly talking about Hulkageddon, since the OP made no such mention of it and only made reference to said "normal circumstances".

(BTW, Announcing that you're going to rob someone's house also does not abrogate your own criminal responsibility.)



If CCP keeps catering only to the bittervets, then that's the only people who will play. And, in reality, the "bittervets" are a very small minority of EVE: Fact: The total average SP for characters on EVE is around 10-14 million. That's how many months of play-time...? 10?

Another Interesting Fact: There are 20,000 trial accounts created each month.

True, EVE is just a game. However, EVE is no longer filling a "niche" - EVE is now in the mainstream, and like it or not, the type of people who are being drawn to EVE are not the same sort of players who got into the game 3, 4, 8 years ago. CCP is going to either have to adapt to these new players (and secure more capital in the process), or it'll unnecessarily restrict itself to a very small player market, which will eventually exhaust itself.

*shrug*

But an untanked Hulk (or barge in general) is just ASKING to be "graped in the mouth!"

Dissallowing suicide ganking is just silly - you all say that that gankers are stopping you from playing the game the way you want - Isn't dissallowing them from ganking preventing them from doing what they want ? It cuts both ways after all.

I was just aiming for a laugh in my last reply. I've never actually fired on a barge of any type, but I couldn't help leaving something in response to the post. I've mined (high, low and nullsec) and never been fired on and I've got friends that have been popped on the undock of their home station. New Eden is a cold place, CCP's never tried to hide that. Sure, new players may end up getting the short end of the stick on a occasion, but in regards to things like Hulkageddon and Goons current attack on ice miners would not, in fact, impact new players in most cases based on the targets. Last time I checked, Ospreys and Bantams weren't on the list of targets

New Eden is also a place where actions have consequences, looks like gankers have had a trouble free ride long enough in my opinion.

I think things are fine the way they are, with the exception of insurance. If you commit a ship to blowing up another ship illegally in high sec, the insurance should be invalidated. If you want to suicide gank, you will really have to want to.

Irrelevant.

A house could have it's doors wide open and no car in the parking lot... but you and you alone would still be held criminally responsible were you to enter the house and take something from it.

Someone could leave their car running and the door wide open... but you and you alone would still be held criminally responsible were you to drive off in it.

And before anyone wants to whine about how "but that's real life, EVE is just a game", my response is: Isn't EVE suppose to be "just like real life"? :-)

Miners and PVEers are moral, God fearing men that everyone should look up to. The just want to play "Everyone vs Everyone" in peace.

Gankers are degenerates that go against the very fibre of this GAME which was obviously created for everyone to mimic the daily real life. Going to work, paying taxes, being a good law abiding citizen.

Another option would be to make high-sec completely PvE and low-sec and 0.0 completely PvP, that way you effectively create different servers on the same server.

Or split the PvE players and PvP players up like two sets of servers, the cost is the problem here plus the populations would be lower on both at least to start with.

And effectively destroy what makes EVE so unique. One universe, one server, where everyone can interact with everyone, aka the Sandbox.

PvE players don't try to impose their playstyle on others whereas PvPers do.

But as things are at the moment the biggest contribution a player can make is to try and understand the other playstyles view point and respect that view point.

(BTW, Announcing that you're going to rob someone's house also does not abrogate your own criminal responsibility.)

The term sandbox is irrelevant to what I've said here, yet another example of it's over use.

Nice try. It is very relevant because what you are suggesting would destroy what EVE is, a big multiplayer sandbox.
The term might be overused but thats because people like you are trying to destroy it.

There have been completely PvE sandboxes.


Saga of Ryzom when it was released for about it's first 2 years was a completely PvE sandbox and it was more of a sandbox than this one.

Then PvP was added, resulting in a rift between the community, and making it a little less of a sandbox, although still more of a sandbox than this one.



Eve is more of a sandbox for PvP players than it is for PvE players, but I still don't consider it to be a true sandbox, because CCP themselves interfere to much, trying to force players to redistribute around Eve for example.

There have been completely PvE sandboxes.

Then PvP was added, resulting in a rift between the community, and making it a little less of a sandbox, although still more of a sandbox than this one.

Eve is more of a sandbox for PvP players than it is for PvE players

Let me enlighten you with something. Griefing is part of the game..

Let me enlighten you with something. Griefing is part of the game.

Quoted for truth and relevance.



The funny thing is, the real carebears are the ones attacking defenseless miners.

If a an unarmed man runs from a fight wherein his assailant has a knife, who's the real coward?

I mean come on, you're not fooling anybody.

Miners are hard working, industrial persons upon which all of EVE depends. People who make it a point to mess with Covetors in hi-sec "for the lulz" and then try to hide behind the (very thin) defense that "nowhere in EVE is safe" are cowardly carebears trying to push responsibility and blame for their own behavior onto a third party (CCP, "game mechanics", or the miners themselves.)

Get real, no one is buying it. If you grief in hi-sec and/or attack miners, you're a carebeard, period.

PS to the OP: If you really care about people's "bottom lines", i have a bottom line that could use a donation of ISKies from you.

If a an unarmed man runs from a fight wherein his assailant has a knife, who's the real coward?

Wrong.

http://support.eveonline.com/Pages/KB/Article.aspx?id=336

The problems in this game stems from the two main playstyles and the PvPers are always at fault for the comflict that sprouts up among a community where both playstyles are trying to coexist.

PvE players don't try to impose their playstyle on others whereas PvPers do.

With Eve however it always been marketed more towards PvP so it's understandable the PvPers resent the PvE players to some extent.


The answer to a lot of the communities problems would be to make it either completely PvP or completely PvE. But of course that won't work because people would leave the game, but might attract new players if it was one or the other.

Another option would be to make high-sec completely PvE and low-sec and 0.0 completely PvP, that way you effectively create different servers on the same server.

Or split the PvE players and PvP players up like two sets of servers, the cost is the problem here plus the populations would be lower on both at least to start with.


What would help is for the standing required for jump clones be reduced by quite a bit, make them more accessable very early on in the game.



But as things are at the moment the biggest contribution a player can make is to try and understand the other playstyles view point and respect that view point.

I like your posts Justin even though I don't necessarily support the same view as you do. You can not discount the small niche gamers that made this community what it is. EVE set out to be a very different MMO from its birth in that players create the story. As it sits you have to have a lot of experience, intelligence, motivation and time on your hands to really leave your fingerprint in this game. The current community appears not to appreciate this dynamic as the entire game is becoming obviously dull in comparison to its colored past. Should we get to the point where the pillars in our community give up on the ideals they once held and make way for these new players that must be spoon fed everything then EVE will be an empty hollow shell of an MMO and hardly exciting enough to entertain these mainstream players.

Giving in to the new mainstream players too much can jeopardize EVE's identity completely and thus ruin the experience for everybody involved.

Another Interesting Fact: There are 20,000 trial accounts created each month.

Nowhere in New Eden is 100% safe.

In Station.

Therefore I deem your entire post invalid.

What I want to say, to all the bitter vets complaining about how soft EVE is, try to start a new char now, but without your connections, your ISK AND without the knowledge you acquired in years (which is not possible as I know).

For noobs starting today EVE might be a little bit harder as when old vets signed up in 2003, higher complexity, established structures and communities, null is not longer a wild west, it has been conquered.

This man is an example for carebears everywhere. Bravo sir. Bravo.

Nah, I can still steal you're stuff in station while waging a 0.01 isk war in the market



I did.

I made Misstress iteron with the aim of only funding with whatever Isk I could make via pvp the other year. I also gave myself the challange of doing this using ONLY Iterons. In this time I have managed to do rather well for myself isk wise managing to make a profit for every ship lost, getting quite a few kills and even getting a whole page in issue 19 of EON dedicated to the Battletron V in the 50 million ISK testflight challenge.

There are some very good tools for new starters compared to when I started plus you now get more SP, better turtorials, free ships and lots more isk and this is before we also add in EVE uni and noobie drives by big 0.0 powers who teach them the ropes.

Ganking is part of the game.

It doesn't matter whether or not its part of the game. Lots of things USED TO BE part of the game. Hell, super carriers with drones are part of the game but they soon won't be. The only real discussion to have is whether or not it SHOULD BE part of the game. So, rather than telling everyone thats how it is and suck it, tell us why it should be part of the game. My guess is that you're argument will essentially be 1. its part of the game 2. nothing should be safe 3. Variations on risk vs reward. The argument will likely be refuted with 1. my post above 2. griefing should have limits 3. nullsec carebear bots mean sov holders get huge rewards for no risk while they simultaneously berate hisec carebears (and bots).

But the real discussion doesn't happen on these boards or on any eve related board. Its the internal discussion that potential subscribers have with themselves. CCP has to find a happy middle ground that allows people with some reservations about non-consensual pvp to say to themselves, "its dangerous, but that will be fun" but NOT say to themselves "the constant griefing isn't worth it."

There is an incredibly easy solution to the problem: remove all of the isk making grinds and industrial/trading portions of the game. Put out an endless supply of free ships. Everyone will PvP because there wouldn't be anything to lose.

There is an incredibly easy solution to the problem: remove all of the isk making grinds and industrial/trading portions of the game. Put out an endless supply of free ships. Everyone will PvP because there wouldn't be anything to lose.

griefing should have limits

Nowhere in New Eden is 100% safe.

[quote=baltec1]


But you already knew how EVE works, you knew the mechanisms, you knew the tools, so sorry you did not, because of your knowledge you can never start like a real noob

I see you didnt read all of my post.

It doesn't matter whether or not its part of the game. Lots of things USED TO BE part of the game. Hell, super carriers with drones are part of the game but they soon won't be. The only real discussion to have is whether or not it SHOULD BE part of the game. So, rather than telling everyone thats how it is and suck it, tell us why it should be part of the game. My guess is that you're argument will essentially be 1. its part of the game 2. nothing should be safe 3. Variations on risk vs reward. The argument will likely be refuted with 1. my post above 2. griefing should have limits 3. nullsec carebear bots mean sov holders get huge rewards for no risk while they simultaneously berate hisec carebears (and bots).

There is an incredibly easy solution to the problem: remove all of the isk making grinds and industrial/trading portions of the game. Put out an endless supply of free ships. Everyone will PvP because there wouldn't be anything to lose.

But you already knew how EVE works, you knew the mechanisms, you knew the tools, so sorry you did not, because of your knowledge you can never start like a real noob

While at present its true that no ship in space is totally safe, there is the question: Is it best for the game of Eve for it to remain that way?

Ive seen many posts supporting high sec ganking that to me look like the gankers are trying to remain relevant. But to me it seems the main ones who benefit from ganking are the gankers, those who get the short end are the victims. And there are far more victims than gankers.

Given this imbalance, should high sec ganking remain part of the game? Does it really add a net value to Eve?

Also there is the issue of what high sec ganking does to subscriptions. If it was removed would eve grow faster than if it remained? When you unsub you get a questionnaire asking why. CCP has some idea of how many people quit due to ganks. CCP most likely also knows how many ships are destroyed in high sec due to ganks and thus could answer the question of how big a driver it is to the economy. CCP is in a position to estimate whether removing high sec ganking would make for more subs without hurting the economy. Maybe CCP has done this and are leaning toward their removal, and hence all these "gankers trying to remain relevant" threads.

My guess is high sec ganking is entertainment for a tiny minority while being an annoyance and a pall to game play for a large number of others, and does little to to drive the economy. And if so, it may be best to just remove it.

@The Apostle and Justin Credulent

Interesting to see that two players that joined the game a couple of months ago have embarked on a crusade to change a game thats been played a certain way since 2003.

Considering EVE has been growing for almost a decade now and that I have had one gank attempt in the past 6 years on one of my haulers I would say its a none issue to all but a few.

And this is actually a fair point.

Even Hulkageddon was limited in that it ran for 10 days or so. No real biggie. But a concerted effort to bring suicide ganking to a sustained and deadly (long-term?) operation is a whole new ball game.

There are players in Eve that are ONLY miners. It's all they do. It's all they've trained to be. Sustained and prolonged miner victimization WILL have an effect on their ability to enjoy the game. It will cost.

It's a very short-sighted view to be quoting nothing but memes to justify repeated vicious acts in the name of "the sandbox" on ONE type of player.

There are players in Eve that are ONLY miners. It's all they do. It's all they've trained to be. Sustained and prolonged miner victimization WILL have an effect on their ability to enjoy the game. It will cost.

We are talking about a handfull of systems in gal space. The vast bulk of high sec is business as usaual and ganks a rare thing.

I didn't realize we had managed to shut down all mining in the game. That's impressive even for us!

Have YOU kept up with the news?

Have you kept up with the news?

Let me guess...Riverini made up some more stuff about us?

Let me guess...Riverini made up some more stuff about us?

stuff

Mittens himself said he is talking to Helicity to start a campaign that would make previous Hulkageddons look like dog and pony shows.

He may also be no more than trolling. I accept that as a possibility as well but he has posted twice on Eve-O about it.

Any player that is HAPPY to have fire rain down on their heads is either a masochist or flat-out lying.

Two words: Stockholm Syndrome

EVEs core mechanics and idea should NOT change because miners are to lazy to align to a station and keep an eye on the overview if a combat ship is approaching them.

Ok Mr 7 accounts.

EVEs core mechanics and idea should NOT change because miners are to lazy to align to a station and keep an eye on the overview if a combat ship is approaching them.

Let me guess, you are one of those people in real life that never does anything for fear of losing. Half of the fun of this game is that you may lose your 'stuff' at any point in time. Playing games without the potential of loss equals a massive waste of time. Even more of a waste of time then losing that ship you worked weeks to get into. PERIOD!


Slade

It's 4.


Ofc. Your views are noted and have been waxed lyrically on by a few with the same moronic mentality.

"Combat ship approaching" and "Align to station" are two such moronic points of contention.

As I have said countless times, you are asking me to believe that EVERY SINGLE MINER of the 1500+ taken out by Goons in the ice interdiction alone were stupid and had no idea at all how to play. NONE of them?

It's 4.


Ofc. Your views are noted and have been waxed lyrically on by a few with the same moronic mentality.

"Combat ship approaching" and "Align to station" are two such moronic points of contention.

As I have said countless times, you are asking me to believe that EVERY SINGLE MINER of the 1500+ taken out by Goons in the ice interdiction alone were stupid and had no idea at all how to play. NONE of them?

Ofc. Your views are noted and have been waxed lyrically on by a few with the same moronic mentality.

"Combat ship approaching" and "Align to station" are two such moronic points of contention.

As I have said countless times, you are asking me to believe that EVERY SINGLE MINER of the 1500+ taken out by Goons in the ice interdiction alone were stupid and had no idea at all how to play. NONE of them?

Actually, if you read the chat logs posted to our internal boards and some of the eve mails that have posted, you'd be inclined to agree that a great many of those lost barges were flown by people that had no idea they could even be shot at in High Sec.

He's not joking about this. When the interdiction started I used to get daily threats from pubbies about reporting me for shooting them in high sec.

Any miner with his brain turned on will see a threat coming a mile away and gtfo.

And I'm not arguing this either. I ran a litle experiment yesterday that went like this.

I started an alt. Undocked, took a shot at some dude, get my little yellow tag for "aesthetic purposes".

I then went out to some random belt with 0.6, and orbited 2 Hulks and an Orca sitting less than 2k apart. I even locked and scanned and made every pretense that I was a warp-in point. They didn't move. 1 or 2 smartied BS's would have done some serious pain.

With one other mining gang, I did exactly the same thing, they warped off but they would have been dead long before they got to warp speed.

My point is that a lot of people are 1) arrogant or ignorant enough to think they can't be killed or 2) simply have no idea.

I'm not about to make excuses for arrogance but I'm adamant that we need to be providing ways to be more tolerant of ignorance. Noobs DON'T get Eve until they are dead in their 200m Hulks. Then they may just as well quit.

If ganking activity escalates to a prolonged and sustained campaign, the ramification of potential unsubs and/or a direct intervention by CCP MAY well occur.

THIS worries me more than wasting my time trying to bash you for defending a quaint idealogy. Some people just don't get Eve and we need to be making a place or a process to give them time to adjust to the realities, if the status quo should remain.

Calling this for the bullshit it is. And if you were'nt such a new char to eve-O you'd know that this has been repeatedly refuted with several examples.

Even the BEST and SMARTEST miner can be ganked. The only variables needed are TIME and QUANTITY.

My point is that a lot of people are 1) arrogant or ignorant enough to think they can't be killed or 2) simply have no idea.

I'm not about to make excuses for arrogance but I'm adamant that we need to be providing ways to be more tolerant of ignorance. Noobs DON'T get Eve until they are dead in their 200m Hulks. Then they may just as well quit.

PS: For those pointing out that being in a station is 100% safe, I got a question: Have you tried to scam someone through a trade or contract? Have you dealt with 0.01ISK games? Have you seen your corp assets get stolen by a corp thief?

So since im such a clueless noob and all my arguments are bullshit why dont you enlighten me?


So every profession in EVE should have risk involved except mining? Is that what you are saying?
Missioners can loose ships to if scrambled by a rat or some other mishap.
Should missions ships be invulnerable so they dont risk loosing them and start mass unsubs?

Those who miners and missioners who wish to be left alone.

What?!!?!?!

tl;dr (Inane subject line)

Honestly, the best advise I could give to someone that wants to mine and be safe... join a decent nullsec alliance and move out of empire. I've mined (I'm not afraid to admit it) in High, Low and Nullsec and mining in Nullsec was probably the safest I've been when it came to mining. The best belts need to be scanned down, which means the reds and neutrals need probes to find you and that gives you extra time to warp to a POS and safe up before they find you and make veldspar dust out of you.

As perverse as it is for me to agree with a Goon this is perfectly true and may well prove to a consequence of continued highssec ganking. Better the known enemy.

But it may cause issues for Eve as a whole because to mine for Alliance X and sell to Alliance Y could well be seen as treason.

There may be alliance embargoes about selling rocks on the open market, in addition to alliances themselves putting the squeeze on miners profits through ridiculous refining percentages.

This will become a very serious inflation issue if the rumour about Drone mineral drops are also true.

risk vs reward poor miners blah blah etc stuff

Probably the best Goon poster.

And Apostle is pretty cool, he kills rocks & doesn't afraid of anything.

And are you still arguing about semantics?

Poor miners? How are they poor? Cut the crap man seriously.
And 3m/h might apply for starter characters that are a couple week old. Miners sit on their fat asses doing nothing and earn isk while watching a movie, reading a book or whatever they do. And just by paying just a tiny bit of attention they dont risk anything.
Rewards in highsec are already to high vs risk. Highsec should be nerfed not buffed.

But as many have said, yes doing minor changes to, for example insurance (cutting it in half if you are killed by Concord), is something that most players can accept.
Making miners immune to game mechanics is not something people will accept.
Deal with it, accept it, adapt or move on to another game. Period.

Then the only thing we can agree on is that we disagree. If you seriously believe that ganking is so easily avoided then anything I have to say is void. The statistics speak for themselves.

Yes they do.

The vast bulk of miners will never be suicide ganked.

Then the only thing we can agree on is that we disagree. If you seriously believe that ganking is so easily avoided then anything I have to say is void. The statistics speak for themselves.


PS: I must admit I chuckle at "he" shouldn't be allowed to do what he wants when one of the potential solutions is about preventing "you" from doing what "you" want. I don;t know if you have the intelligence to see the irony.

Thus, another reason why I left Majesta Empire.

Anyone who seriously mines in highsec deserves to be ganked. As a miner you could easily get accepted into any renter alliance or nullsec alliance that has a Indy Corp. You could then site in hidden belts mining ABC ore making 10x what you do in highsec. Most corporations will buy your ore close to Jita price and even if it is lower its still more then you make in highsec. Added to the fact that you are surrounded by intel channels and have a clear idea of who is hostile or not. Lastly as a miner you generally aren't really expected to do much other then maybe a mining Op 1-2 times a week.

As I said in another thread, the miners and mission runners that you despise so much make up the majority of the players, so your 'HTFU or GTFO' comment is a little naive, as you'd soon get very bored with noone to shoot and a game that is no longer financially viable to develop any further. Ironically, this means that the gankers are parasites, living off the efforts of their hosts. A perfectly acceptable game mechanic, but please don't cry when CCP try not to let you kill their game by driving the majority of the players away.

The 'hard core' players don't get the 'game' concept as much as the PvE players don't get the 'gank' concept. The hard core players are either trying to win at a MMO (well, DUH!) or trying to make RL money out of it, whilst everyone else is just playing a game:

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/online_gaming

Feel free to back up your claim that the majority of EVE-¦s players are highsec hugging carebears that only do missions and mining and nothing else.
If you do not have the numbers stfu.

That would have a much worse effect on the game than anything we (Goons) do.

Not exactly. You are ignoring the fact that renter alliances and null sec alliances tend to treat miners like crap. Miners are generally regarded as extra firepower that can be used as cannon fodder when needed. CTAs are common, some mining ops tend to force miners to mine for free, the list goes on. It is true one can make profit in null sec, but the action is minimal in terms of how often you get attacked unless you mine near a contested system.

Not exactly. You are ignoring the fact that renter alliances and null sec alliances tend to treat miners like crap. Miners are generally regarded as extra firepower that can be used as cannon fodder when needed. CTAs are common, some mining ops tend to force miners to mine for free, the list goes on. It is true one can make profit in null sec, but the action is minimal in terms of how often you get attacked unless you mine near a contested system.

Even if he's right and the high sec carebears outnumber everybody else it doesn't mean that CCP should drastically change their game to make them more secure. That would have a much worse effect on the game than anything we (Goons) do.

Anyone who seriously mines in highsec deserves to be ganked. As a miner you could easily get accepted into any renter alliance or nullsec alliance that has a Indy Corp.

a lot of miners expect to be treated like gods

Well, that's all well and good until they (a) get ganked on the first null sec gate they jump through because the invite to null sec was just a scam oriented towards padding out kill boards, or (b) are ejected from the alliance due to not participating in CTAs, never sending defence fleets, and not having appropriate numbers of kills per month. Being part of a renter alliance simply means that you're a target who your landlord is not shooting yet.

Of course, if you are recruiting, go ahead and post a link to your recruitment post in the EVE Online recruitment forums or your alliance's own external site. If you're not recruiting, I would suggest that you are commenting based on hearsay and are not actually aware of who is doing the mining or where the minerals are actually coming from.

So since yall dont mine your gods??? HAHAHHAHAA... got to love posters now days.. want to be MS 13 canidates on the internet

Im terrified and anyone claiming high sec numbers arent greater than everyone else is an idiot since if you look at dev blogs CCP even admits it.as for alliances in 0.0 taking miners and industrials?? HAHAHAHAHA and have some one compete with thier BOTS i dont think so,

You get blown up, lose a 200m Hulk and that's good for business because you sell what, Hulks?

Well, that's all well and good until they (a) get ganked on the first null sec gate they jump through because the invite to null sec was just a scam oriented towards padding out kill boards,

Not so nice to see you again, Lady GoDiveHer.

As usual, I think we would all appreciate it if you wrote your comments on toilet paper and stuck them to your face.

lol. You didn't see the funny side of that?

I'm betting that's HALF the problem with Eve right there. Yer just too fn serious!

What statistics man? You keep claiming things without backing them up with proof.

Like the claim that EVE will die if CCP doesnt turn it into carebear land.

Also I am now convinced that your flawed viewpoint has run out of arguments. I cannot think of another reason why you would try to insult my intelligence.

ONE of the options to mitigate this merry-go-round is potentially making SOME "carebear" areas so that mineral pries can be moderated. This fixation by some on making "eve" a total carebear land by restricting suicide ganks in a very small corner of Eve is both short-sighted and silly. That has NEVER been put forward as an option.

The problem with this idea is botting. Unless CCP finds a way to curb botting (in highsec and nullsec,) making an area that would be 100% safe, even if it was ONLY a couple of systems, would cause mineral prices to crash and they're already too low. By creating areas that would be 100% safe all of the time, you'd also remove the risk portion of risk vs reward. As noted above, maybe it's just a balance issue when it really comes down too it. Remove or cut insurance based on sec status or if you were killed by CONCORD, it really is a decent idea. A corp mate mentioned the other day that if he used his car to blow something up, State Farm wouldn't cover the loss and he's right. I'd suggest a buff on mining barges / exhumers, but with the right tank, a Hulk can already sit in a nullsec belt and deal with BS Rats without issue and that was the whole point of them if I recall, no change needed there.

I had a really nice, well thought out response, but CCP's "New Forums" ate it. Aren't you glad?

"Stupid miners don't know how to fly ships, don't get it" ad nuseum.

Some blokes haven't learned Ctrl C, Crtl V.

And you call miners stupid.

Who is to say that the Hulk pilot doesn't have a logi pal to back him up? And I've seen plenty of friendly high-sec corps willing to help a miner out. If the Hulk is not alone, and there is a plan in place (and a strategy that adapts accordingly), a Hulk can surely survive the 2x Alpha Brutix.

Of course, this all assumes that the Hulk is alone. Who is to say that the Hulk pilot doesn't have a logi pal to back him up?

Only point here I pick is that logi on alpha strike is a waste of time. Cycle is too slow - you MAY help survival if you stagger cycle the reppers but 2 x alpha will still punch straight through.

Interesting to see that two players that joined the game a couple of months ago have embarked on a crusade to change a game thats been played a certain way since 2003.

Stop taking it so seriously. This is just a game after all.

Only two things I would like to see happen to shut up alot of folks

1 civillain ships made tougher
2 criminal status people shouldnt be allowed in high sec.

Dissallowing suicide ganking is just silly - you all say that that gankers are stopping you from playing the game the way you want - Isn't dissallowing them from ganking preventing them from doing what they want ? It cuts both ways after all.

Yes, its a pvp-centric game

I'd like to see what you'd post on the forums if all the miners in the game, including the bots, stopped mining for a few months.

There needs to be a threat to high sec miners, belt rats are not one. So leave suiciding the way it is or up belt rats to the point where you need a fitted tank to survive. Up mining ship tanks across the board to compensate for these stronger belt rats so miners aren't gimped but restrict drones on mining ships to mining drones only. These spawns will also escalate in damage eventually to the point where no mining ships should be able to survive without external support. Two options, get support from others or warp to a different belt and wait for despawn.

Mining needs to be more dangerous, the occasional gank outside of the goon blue ice fun is not dangerous, a minor nuisance perhaps. Belt rats need buff (in damage, not in ISK, no one farms belt rats in high-sec anyway and there is no reason to add incentive). Starter systems can be the exception to the rule for these belt rats with weak belt rats spawning there but there should be a large reduction in the asteroids in these systems.

I'd like to see what you'd post on the forums if all the miners in the game, including the bots, stopped mining for a few months.

This is actually something I'd be curious about. Not the forum posts, but what would actually happen to New Eden's economy if one day the miners all went on strike (bots included.) I'm sure there are stockpiles of minerals, so it would take a while for the impact, but still...

More chaos is needed in high sec !

Invite each and every -10 and gank everything from 1.0 to 0.5

Kill haulers, missioners, miners, passers, noobs, everything on your overview just gank it!

The sooner CCP will be forced to do something about high sec the sooner "high sec" will mean something.

You guys are on the right track, just keep it, your efforts will soon pay off.

More chaos is needed in high sec !

[GǪ]

The sooner CCP will be forced to do something about high sec the sooner "high sec" will mean something.

You guys are on the right track, just keep it, your efforts will soon pay off.

[quote=Tanya Powers]The sooner CCP will be forced to do something about high sec the sooner "high sec" will mean something.

For those that gank in high sec purely for the tears and rage. And then post long winded stories and claims of a pool of tears from the victims. Is this not an admission of "Griefing" and again breaking the EULA and TOS?

This. But CCP has a history of enforcing their EULA.... "selectively"...

This. But CCP has a history of enforcing their EULA.... "selectively"...

Both of you should go to crime and punishment and read the thread CCP made dedicated to tears. There is nothing against ganking or tear collecting in the EULA

If you gank someone once, it's not griefing. If you come back five minutes later and they're back there mining away and you do it again, you might be bordering on griefing. If you do it a third time, I'd consider that griefing as you're targeting the SAME player over and over again and are now harassing them.

If you gank someone once, it's not griefing. If you come back five minutes later and they're back there mining away and you do it again, you might be bordering on griefing. If you do it a third time, I'd consider that griefing as you're targeting the SAME player over and over again and are now harassing them.

I don't know how CCP views their EULA, but that's how I'd see it if I were in their shoes.